Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Are Oldschool and Sandbox gamers blind?
luckturtz
Member Posts: 422
Sandbox games out
Mortal Online,Fallen Earth,Darkfall,Earthrise,Vanguard,Ryzom,EvE,Wurm,Perpetum,Maginobi,Xyson
Sandbox gaming being made
Archage,Dawntide,The Repouplation,Origins,Embers of Careus
I am pretty sure i forgot some but the point remains the same,Complainers have selective vision when "they say omg they aren't making any sandboxes" or "omg they aren't making like they use" which is BS.
Here is the catch one game on the two list,Vanguard(which some people won't call a sandbox but is probably the most old school game) is made by support by major company all the rest are Indie games.All the people who complain about Sandbox games or "MMO aren't same" this what they are really saying
"I want major companies to spend 100 million on a game that will probably be a niche game,I am ignoring all the small games with the playing style i want because i want huge game support by big company"
I understand it somewhat but does not make any sense i see people going WoW style game suck and keep trying them,Then i see them say i wish there was a game that has a large open world(vanguard),deep game play(Vanguard) interesting classes(vanguard),great crafting(Vanguard) good player housing(vanguard).There is a game on the market that has everything you want why aren't you playing it? The funny thing is i would bet money if SOE closed Vanguard,wait six months released a new game called Ranguard which looks mighty familiar to Vanguard,that game would be huge success.
They are make games you like they are indie games not by companies so they have lesser resources which normal mean inferior graphics but playstyle you are looking for right now.Will you ever get one of those 100 million games to be a sandbox,Maybe 38 studios is making a game they made sandbox rpg single player game their mmo might be influnence by that,EverQuest Next might go back to more of its roots,You might get the perfect storm of IP and gamestyle like SWG before the change.
Please stop being blind though They never stop making sandboxes or strong virtual world mmos,They just became minority instead of majority when Ultima,EQ and others rule the market and they are now being made by small companies who can afford to risk to make a niche game.The mmo market is so big today they is more than enough room for a free to play games,sub games,Sandboxes game,theme park games,Action mmo,tab targeting mmo,etc..MMO should not be one style of game or one style of pricing...I am curious to what going to happen when Archage comes out which will have great graphics with huge budget..You will here people say it is not sandboxy enough...I don't like Asian art style.I am not saying to settle for bad games but please stop pretending that you are not being present with enough of fair choices of gaming for your game style.
Comments
I guess what they mean to say is "there's no AAA sandbox MMORPGs". All the ones you listed above that have been released are in decline, shite or being shutdown soon.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience"
CS Lewis
All the ones you have listed as being out at the moment are bad IMO except for EvE but that doesn't play like most MMOs. Waiting on Archage.
My theme song.
I've at least trialed if not played all of those, except Maginobi, didn't that release under a different name in the US? Is that Vindictus? If so, I've spent a few hours in that, too. Gender locked classes annoy the piss out of me though.
Several others failed me because they had the kind of UI or camera perspective or movement control that drives me to uninstall an hour after logging in. Which doesn't mean others won't like them, and even I will sometimes go back, reinstall one of these, and see if my tolerance for whatever bugged me is higher the second go around.
If Earthrise and Xsyon had a love child, the end result would be a solid sandbox (although the nursery would need some serious fumigation to get rid of the bugs) but by themselves, they lack. Earthrise has no sand in its box, it's just an FPS with some grind tacked on, while Xsyon is a real sandbox that had plenty of non-combat things to do, but not enough combat oriented activities, including pve (or it didn't the last time I checked in on the forum). Plus a few other features were missing. Such as cooking and taming (again, last I checked). And then there was some community drama on the forums that I won't even get into, although for the most part, in game, the community was quite good. Xsyon's problem is it really needs more time and money. I still have hope for it and for two solid months I had a huge amount of fun in it. And I spent a lot of hours in game, too.
As for Earthrise, they should have listened to players outside the hardcore pvp niche. I know for a fact that their beta forum had many threads by SWG refugees yearning for more than a killbox experience because I got into the beta a day or so before launch and spent quite a bit of time reading the thread collection there. I looked forward to the launch of Earthrise for years, I read about it pretty early on in its development, and I am still bitterly disappointed over the end result, but for different reasons than a lot of players give. Bugs I can cope with to some extent, as well as lag, and it's still the most visually stunning gameworld that I've ever seen. I'm not saying the graphics are perfect, but the visual team aren't just coders, they're artists. But I can't play in a game world that doesn't feel like it's 'lived' in, no matter how pretty it is. And Earthrise lacks that live in feel. In fact, it's most like a themepark in that aspect than in any other. No player housing, no social activities or gathering places, no crafting that doesn't revolve around killing, and the crafting process itself was pretty grindy and annoying. It's really all about the pvp, and open world pvp does not a sandbox make. Exploring was quite enjoyable, though, I will say that. I roamed all over the place in that game. In fact, of all the games I've spent money on this year, Xsyon and Earthrise were the only two that made me feel like I really got my money's worth out of the box price.
What happened to that Repopulation thread? That one looks like a hopeful sandbox up and comer that could have been the love child of Xsyon and Earthrise. Then there's Life is Feudal, another potential up and comer. Dawntide I'm still not sure about. I played it quite a bit in beta, but something never clicked with me. I might revisit it. You should add it to your list up there. *Edit* Whoops, you do have it up there.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
I don't mind a theme park or story grind. What I do mind, however, is the lack of things to do during end-game. Am I to delve into redundant Battlegrounds and Raids 24-7?
No.
Sometimes I want to put the engine and neutral and just relax, e.g., plop down a house, start a shop, entertain myself with deep crafting, meet new faces and possibly join with them via player cities.
Why is the current mentality "either or"? I want both in one game.
saying that Vanguard is old school says it all me thinks......you know nothing about OLD school games.
Vanguard is the closest it ever got to a Sandbox in modern mmo's tough.
talk UO and stuff......where you could do ALOT more then Vanguard......then we talking a good sandbox.
and when Archage arrives 70% of the so called old school vets gonna start bitching and moaning bout the state of the game
within the first week after release.
Vanguard as a sandbox game? Seriously? Why not just declare WoW to be a sandbox game and say that proves that sandboxes are popular?
Vanguard is the only game on your list that I've played, and while it's not really a proverbial WoW clone, it's closer to being one than a majority of the MMORPGs that I've played. Now, that's partially a statement on which particular games I've played. But if Vanguard is a sandbox, then I have no clue what the term means anymore. I thought sandboxes were supposed to be a lot more open-ended.
Only if it has a release like FFXIV. I expect mostly "WoW clone" gameplay with sandbox elements. It looks like fun.
My theme song.
When I really think about what I enjoy in an MMO, I have to consider myself more of a hybrid fan than a sandbox or themepark fan, because everything I play is always measured up against the standard set by Anarchy Online, since that was the first MMO I played, the one I enjoyed and played longest, and the one that got more things right over all than any other MMO I've tried. Not to say it was perfect and not to say it couldn't have been improved upon in many ways, mind you.
AO let me choose my own path, a good hybrid could do that now. I want to quest, I can quest, I want to grind, I can grind, I want to solo, I can solo (although AO wasn't as solo friendly as I would have liked, and wasn't at all during the last 20 levels). If I wanted to craft, there was crafting, but that is one area I think could have been expanded on. I could do missions at a terminal for items, including specific items, (thanks to an allowed player mod). I could decorate my apartment with loot that dropped, or roam around, exploring the huge open world (worlds, actually) killing for levels and loot without feeling punished for not being at the beck and call of an NPC.
I could play a pet class that pretty much made me an entire team by myself or I could do missions with teams of players, or I could grind mobs in open world with teams of players. I actually did a lot of grouping in AO and I didn't resent teaming with other players until after level 200, when it became the only practical way to level, at which point, I hated it. Not because I hated grouping, but because I felt forced to do it, and forced to do the same dungeons too many times. I also felt forced to pvp and I hated that, too. It's one thing to want to do it, it's another to feel like you have to.
Boy was I naive, compared to later games I tried, including AoC, Anarchy Online was quite good about not forcing me into a particular activity to 'progress'. Even so, I never reached level cap after many years of playing. As soon as I feel coerced into jumping through MMO hoops, I get cranky and quit playing (and paying).
So yeah, give me a hybrid, give me lots of choices. Give me a game where I can reach the max of whatever there is to max without ever having to kill a single mob or player if I don't want to. Give me a way to reach the max of whatever there is to max without doing anything except pvp, give me a game with safe areas and ffa full loot and then add a place with faction warfare, all on the same huge server. Let me choose where to spend my time and what I'll be doing in the game and why. That's my definition of a sandbox, and there's room in it for themepark elements, including story lines and quests. There just isn't room for rails.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
If blizzard invested 50 million in a sandbox and lost it. It would be a dent, it would lower some stocks, they then create a new game and this would cover the loses. They be OK and they survive. If an indy company creates a 1 million MMO and lost it all. The owner would be bankrupt (depending on the laws in his country, but the company would be for sure), the employee would be out of a job, the investors would have lost there money and they usually smaller investers and not some huge investor.
Believe me big companies can afford the risk, they just not willing to take it. Stocks are just more importend. It save and secure to simply create a game they will be profitable by using an old formula then trying something new. There are some decent sandboxes out there, but development is to slow to make them into something proper. A bigger buget does not mean it will be good, but the changes would be bigger.
They're not going to get away with dressing that old formula up in a fancy hat and a new dress and calling it something different for much longer. Mark my words (down for later, to mock me with if I'm wrong), MMO companies and investors are going to have to start taking risks soon or MMO players are going to abandon the genre, or at least drastically reduce the amount of time and money they spend.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
Well the "Theme Park" seems to be the new risk. Most developers are too stupid to realize this. Have you taken a look at the post-wow smashing success list? - Age of Conan, Vanguard, Warhammer Online, Aion, Star Trek Online, Tabula Rasa, Champions Online, DC Universe, SWG (NGE) etc....
How the heck can the OP or anyone call any of these games a sandbox game?
There is no set of tools [sandbox] to manipulate,the games are all full of presets that cannot be changed or manipulated.The mobs do not change they only respawn over and over in the same nodes,the buildings don't change,your housing is notihng more than pre sets,you can't design and build your own home.Yes there is some [very few] that allow some terrain movement but the rest of the game suffers badly in those.
I wish people would could using labels on MMORPG gaming,they really are misusing the terms anyhow.
A REAL sandbox and only a very minimal one,would have to start by creating an eco system.This means that you the players could control the mob population and resources.Harvesting nodes are just respawns in the same nodes,perhaps make some kind of design where players can control the nodes,idk maybe via property ownership or something.
As for gear the games could do something minimal like allow players to not just dye but allow players to use any texture in the game to coat their gear.They would also allow players to manipulate stats,but the stats need to mean something ,not like EQ2 where each class relies on one stat.
The games without doubt would need to create an editor the same way ut99 did and allow players to import from compatible 3d programs their own housing models.Player models i don't think would work because altthough they could be made the same size to fit existing models,too many different ones in same area would lag the game badly.
Players could maipulate effects on spells or weapons as long as they use effects [animated textures] that are already in game.This again is only a minim al sandbox feature,a real sandbox woudl allow players top create their own.
I don't know if players could host their own maps and have other players instance into theirs ,bandwidth would be a problemin in many cases,but i think it is doable.
Everything i mentioned is at least close to being called "Sandbox"nothing the op mentions or others are even remotely close to being a sandbox game.Using labels which i really hate,ALL of these games are thempark games,it is just that some have VERY few rides when compared to others ..example DF or Eve have VERY few rides,the worlds are full of empty space or empty terrain.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I don't disagree with your points,I keep on looking for "the Oblivion of MMO" Sandbox game which has strong story elements and themepark but gives the freedom to do what you want.I want both not either in one direction but with that said they should options people who want either direction.
I was not make fun idie games but if want to compare their success to games mention fine
AoC is a failure but AoC once had 700,000 subs,Also went F2P and got 300,000 players in one month.Aoc was released to early
Vanguard was release to early has been criminal mismanaged,Vanguard was failures is not because of the game itself.I said it before in my post,SOE can take Vanguard off the market repackage as another game,It will make huge money.MMO players rarely go back to games that fail at launch.
War had 800,000 subs,War was released to early
Champions and Startrek-Have low budgets if you think cryptic spend huge amount of money those you are crazy.It is clear the city of heroes gaming engine being used those games did cost much to make.They probably made back what cost to make those game on opening day sales.
DC Online-Another mismanged game(suprise suprise SOE again).It didn't take rocket scientist to see that a game on console with sub fee isn't a good idea.
Aion- 3.5 million subs at one point.2.5 million in Asia,Aion was and is a success in asia but fail in the US.
I am not making fun of Indie games but tell me which is the better investment for a big company.Make a game that attracts between 800,000 to 2.5 million gamers and figure out to how to keep those gamers or Make a game that starts out 100k and slow works itself up 300k.Companies are failing at retention which is why Rifts has huge retention plan and SWtor has retention plan.The number have not been bad for themeparks they just fail holding customers and in most case the games weren't finished at release.
My point remains if you spending 100 million a game,your best choice is the WoW model if you are trying to make your money back.People like to Critize AoC or Aion but made tons of money up front and they are still around making a profit at some point if they haven't already they will make back what it cost to make the game.While SOE and EA is big enough companies to eat the cost failures,So as long War,Vanguard and DC online are making profits they are fine.Gamers need to separate emotions from buiness.In terms of pure buiness theme park so far have proven to be a better choice.Which is important to understand why companies keep make themepark style games
Every feature you list would definitely be considered a sandbox feature, but to require that sandbox games have those features is kind of ridiculous.
By your definition, UO was not a sandbox. It did not have any real kind of ecology, mobs just respawned at spawn points. Also, you could only dye clothes a solid color. In fact, I don't know if any MMORPG released would satisfy your definition of sandbox. Maybe Eve, I've never played it so I'm not really sure.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
As a person who has been visiting these forums since 2004, you're probably familiar with the many MMOs that have come and gone over the past few years.
In light of that, I'm curious whether you just ignore that when this 50 million dollar game fails scores of people lose their jobs, or you simply don't care that when a game fails score of people lose their jobs.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
There is no sandbox......only a litter box filled with sand and cat shit.
They're doing a hell of a lot better than MMO's that aren't themepark MMO's, like examples as LotrO, Aion and Rift clearly prove.
If making over 200 million dollars in a year like Aion did last year and still having 70-100 servers worldwide isn't considered good, then I don't know what is.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
A broke-ass, incomplete game is still... a broke-ass, incomplete game, no matter what. I've dealt with enough of that over the years. Some of us have standards, you know.
"I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)
nvm, misunderstanding.
"I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)
Have you played Maginobi or Vanguard? Neither of the two are in ANY way sandbox.
Vanguard is very similar to Everquest; one of the first big themepark games.
Not that it is a bad game; I loved vanguard (up until level 50 then it is a bad game).
If LOTRO is not a themepark then Mortal Online really is the modern UO. Also in this "other dimension" I am married to Paris Hilton (for her cash) and am having an affair with the early 1990's version of Cindy Craford. =P
? Strange conclusion. I was saying that LotrO, Aion, Rift were examples of themepark MMO's that are doing quite a lot better than non-themepark MMO's. Should have been obvious
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
I'm not going to play or pay for a horribly coded and supported game like Xsyon or MO only because somebody put a "Sandbox" tag on it.
Moreover, Fallen Earth is as themepark as it gets (a pay to win themepark).
"Only in quiet waters do things mirror themselves undistorted.
Only in a quiet mind is adequate perception of the world."
Hans Margolius
I put the disclaimer that people wouldn't agree it is sandbox but this topic is also about the old school players who claim they are no making games like EQ 1 anymore.The whole point of this topic was to show that industry is still making sandboxes and deep rpg mmo games but they are being made by indie companies and not by huge companies who goals are to make profits.
AoC,Aion,Lotor failed because they have not grown the population,they have gone down population but in terms of profit they made lots of money at the beginning,they have stablize game the by downsizing working staff and servers and are making a profit now.I am sure Warhammer and vanguard is making a profit it will never make back the 100 million it took make but i am sure ever year it makes more money that cost to run it.EA,NCsoft,Blizzard, and SoE can take loss because they have other profiable games to cover them.Warhammer and Vanguard have some value because they still make money.
You see these topics the industry is ignore my gamestyle not making any games and you would swear that after Ultima,Shadowbane,Asheron Call,EQ 1 that no games where made,Not only have not stop make these games they are good bit of them and new good ones are on the way.
Instead of making 11 million why sandboxes or EQ1 was awesome threads make 11 million Archage,Dawntide,etc threads praise the making of new sandbox games.I am not saying to settle for garbage indie games,Mortal Online was one the worst game i have played and i have played piece of crap that was Alganon launch but they are some solid games like Ryzom and Fallen earth that are worth a look and they are games like Archage that coming out.The Industry has not forgetten you.